About your Search

English 28
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
about a c.i.a. operation in yemen, which foiled a terrorist plot. carl bernstein, he of watergate fame, did not mince words. >> totally inexcusable, that this administration has been terrible on this subject from the beginning. the object of it is to intimidate people who talk to reporters. this was an accident waiting to become a nuclear event. and now it's happened. >> the outrage thus far has been bipartisan. daily news marcus tweeted, people looking for an obama scandal. this one spying on the a.p. is the first legit one. the question remains, who is to blame? according to jay carney. the white house had no knowledge of the doj's seizure of phone records, but house oversight chair darrell issa is having none of it. in a statement yesterday, he wrote americans should take notice that top obama administration officials, increasingly see themselves as above the law and emboldened by the belief that they don't have to answer to anyone. but let us not forget when exactly the white house began to see itself as being above the law. buzz feed reports from 2007, darrell issa voted against a
in which the state department and cia battled over what will be made public. why was there a battle? as we now know at least 12 separate drafts of the talking points initially requested by the house intelligence committee. the cia first draft included language saying islamic extremists with ties to ala cada participated in the attack and referred to cia warnings, describing at least five other attacks in foreign interest in benghazi by unidentified surveillance. but a career diplomat that worked for republican and democratic administrations objected. "why are we encouraging members of congress to start making assertions to the media that we ourselves are not making because we don't want to prejudice the investigation. what was the state department's motivation? the state trying to spare political criticism after the attack. did it feel the cia was too heavy handed for not protecting benghazi when most of the personnel there were attacked to the cia and not state. were state and the white house trying to keep the fact that there was a cia outpost in benghazi hidden as long as possible. the
. if you look at. so comments, some the military folks, the cia folks were highly impressed that the diplomats were willing to take risk to help rescue or comrades this was shocking. where did it come from? if you look back at the white house in particular, dennis mcdonough who is now the white house chief of staff was at that time the deputy of the national security council pulled together a meeting along with bin roads and others which is probably where this -- i think we don't have the proof yet, we need to get it but d where some of these very bad and dangerous decisions were made and where the coverup really had its genesis. >> governor huckabee: we don't know where the president really was. he had one phone call that night. no photos of him in the situation room. no indication, no even white house official coming and saying the president was monitoring this from the situation room from the oval office or even from the residence. we have no idea. what his engagement and involvement was. now,o general, a lot of accusations have come from democrats saying that this is all
of voices trying to create a few talking points. >> dissension within the c.i.a. from the number one to the number two former c.i.a. director, david petraeus and his deputy. >> pete williams, i want to ask you about the special counsel issue. i remember full well when the special counsel was first agreed to by the clinton white house second term and how true to the first lady at the time, hillary clinton's warnings, a narrow investigation into whitewater later expanded. what ken starr reached into, led of course to the personal disclosures and to impeachment. at least the impeachment charge on the hill. if not the conviction. so the administration now, you heard the president saying no special counsel on the irs, will they be able to contain it, do you think to an ig investigation and a criminal investigation ordered by the justice department? >> i don't know what the potential conflict is between the justice department and the irs, the question always come up, can any administration investigate itself. we no longer have the independent counsel law which existed at the time of the cl
intimated before, and that they had orchestrated the removal of some key information from the original cia talking points, notably the referencing of al qaeda, specific al qaeda -- >> that's actually incorrect. but keep going. >> okay. well, lete ask you, based on your assessment from everything that's in the e-mails that were released, is the state department more culpable than perhaps you personally first realized in terms of what they asked to be removed? >> culpable what haof what? what we saw from the beginning is the cia talk the lead in drafting talking points and the talking points became the source of all this faux controversy stirred up by republicans that were drafted by the cia and the issue that drove this fake controversy from the beginning is that ambassador rice went on those sunday shows and said that based on our best assessments now, our intelligence assessments, we believe that there was a spontaneous protest that evolved into the violent attack on the facility in benghazi. we said when this became an issue that that was information that was provided to us by the cia, p
the original drafts talked about extremists with links to al-qaeda and noted the cia had warned for months about threats in benghazi. but all that was taken out before susan rice went on the sunday talk shows. we invited congressmen from two key house panels. mike rogers the republican chair of the intelligence committee and from seattle adam smith the top democrat on the armed services committee. you were on "fox news sunday" september 16 right after susan rice came on the show he and she said it was a spontaneous reaction to a video he that had been hijacked by extremists. from the very beginning you doubted her account. let's watch. >> i have serious questions. it seemed to be a military style coordinated. i'm just suspect that they could come to that conclusion that it was a spontaneous effort given the coordination of it. >> chris: after what you learned this week, the fact of what state department officials were saying during the attack. how often and the talking points were changed, did the obama administration mislead or even lie to the american people? >> well, it is -- here is wh
. in fact, there's almost an antismoking gun, which is the e-mail from the general counsel of the cia, who at one point explicitly writes, i know there's a hurry to get this, but we need to hold it long enough to ascertain whether providing it, this is the original talking points which did have information about al qaeda, which did talk about libya being a wash in weapons and that this being likely an attack by militant extremists, but whether providing it conflicts with the expressed instructions from national security staff, doj, fbi, that in light of the criminal investigation, we are not to generate statements with assessments as to who did this. that sort of sets the ball in motion in terms of scrubbing out all relevant details about who was behind the attack from the talking points. then you put on top of that, that very revealing sort of bureaucratic knife fight between the state department and the cia in which state department officials are taking umbrage at the idea that there were cia warnings about the threat of a terrorist attack. clearly, the cia was trying to push that out th
. these e-mails show exchanges between officials at the white house, the cia, and the state department over exactly what should be said in those talking points, the ones would be first provided to a house intelligence committee, but also provided to susan rice on that sunday following the benghazi attack. and i think the most significant lesson that we learn from reading these documents at this point is at least according to a senior administration official, that they say even though there was a lot of evidence that the state department, as we reported, wanted changes, a senior intelligence official says specifically that they wanted the same changes independently of the state department and that they proactively made those changes. in these documents, we see one of the versions of the talking points, where then deputy cia director mike morel had crossed out a lot of the language in there, specifically language that referred to al qaeda and referred to past cia warnings. the concern among senior administration officials who tell nbc news this was that they didn't want to prejudice the fbi i
year. that the cia had infiltrated an al qaeda plot to blow up an airliner. the bomb was a more advanced version the so-called underwear bomber attempted to use on christmas day in 2009. here was nbc news reporting at the time. >> this is a remarkable success for the intelligence agencies of the united states and its allies. and here's why. they managed to insert a critical informant into the very heart of the terror group that's considered the number one threat to the united states. al qaeda's offshoot in yemen. >> reporter: administration and intelligence officials say by the time this most recent plot was in its final planning stages, the u.s. and its allies were able to follow it in detail. what the terrorists in yemen did not know at the time these officials say is that the person they chose to be the suicide bomber was actually an informant, someone who had agreed to cooperate with an ally intelligence service. members of congress declined to be specific but praised the cia and the overseas counterparts. >> this was incredibly good intelligence work. this is intelligence a
there to advance the story we already knew. we knew this already, but as a reminder, benghazi is more of a cia story than is generally appreciated. that facility there was primarily a cia site where they were doing a lot of work including trying to contain some of the arms they had gotten loose. the cia disputed who was in charge. at the end of the day, it was the deputy cia director morale who took out a lot of language whose deletion republicans object to. by the way, every iteration of the talking point from the first to the last included the assertion originally from the cia that the assault on the facility had originated from an anti-american demonstration. and a lot of people have said, well, the white house just made that up, it was a convenient narrative. that's what the intelligence community was saying from the get-go. susan rice had no role in the talking points. she was totally shafted. they sent her out with these things that she played no part in. she read them and missed the chance to be secretary of state as a result. >> marc l marco rubio was on the daily run down and was aske
house counterterrorism adviser, now cia director, he testified that he was questioned about this. there's the separate leak investigation that involves a whole range of top white house national security officials. and that involves the stucks net computer virus used to disrupt the iranian nuclear program. that means they are well aware of this investigation. they have to notify people at the white house when they get questioned by the fbi, so everybody at the top levels at the white house had to have known about this investigation. >> well, knowing about the investigation versus knowing about the decision to subpoena ap, that is two different issues at this point and the white house is arguing that they couldn't know about those things. >> and look, the details of what was subpoenaed, what was not, that may well be the case, but there's a broader context here, which is that there has been a long standing continue vroversy the aggressive approach that the obama holder justice department has taken to leak investigations in which they have gotten reporter's phone records and e-mails and cr
the cia or the cia making itself look good at the expense of the state department. and then you have the second layer of why in the world were the white house and jay carney so insistent on arguing that the white house had -- and the state department had their hands completely off these talking points and only changed one word when it's entirely clear from what we now know that the state department in particular was very insistent on having these talking points watered down. >> hold on, both of you. i'm going to bring in congressman adam schiff. let me play what jay carney had to say. >> the only edits made at the white house were stylistic and not substantive. they changed the building from consulate to diplomatic facility. >> but we know the talking points were further watered down. so with someone either at the state department or white house trying to cover something up? >> i think the most significant err error in the talking points, and this has been lost in this discussion, the argument that this began as a spontaneous poe test. that stayed in the talking points from the very
use of the cia and the fbi. and by the way, also, illegal use of the irs to target enemies. so while there is some brush to watergate here, this isn't even a mini watergate and republicans are hurting themselves. they may have something here. but this hyperbole doesn't help them. it makes them look like a political gain than a serious attempt to find out what happened. the same thing happened to republicans during the impeachment of bill clinton. the democrats actually gained seats in the congress in the mid-term elections of 1998 because the american people believed that the inquiry was politically motivated rather than motivated for the good of the country. so the accusers have to be careful as well. everybody has to tread a fine line and follow my rules. >> we will do our best. >> and let me break in. the jury has reached a verdict in that trial of west philadelphia abortion doctor, kermit gosnell charged with murder. rehema ellis is following it. >> reporter: weaved heard the jury has reached a verdict. apparently they've come back saying that dr. kermit goss until they is guilty
of e-mails that detailed talking points developed by the cia, white house, and state department. and after the justice department seized associated press phone records for a national security leak investigation, the white house asked the senate to reintroduce a federal shield law to protect reporters and their records from government interference. dan lothian, standing by at the white house, good morning, dan. >> reporter: good morning. you know, the white house today will try to turn attention to some of the international issues that have been outstanding as the president meets with the turkish prime minister at the white house on the aendgentleman, we expect syria, a big issue on the international front, but during their joint news conference, we expect the president will get tough questions on some of the domestic issues. coming one day after the president tried to restore confidence in government by coming down hard on the irs. trying to step out of a political sinkhole, president obama expressed anger at misconduct within the irs. >> inexcusable and americans are right to b
department of the u.s. embassy in the russian capital. the russians say he's actually a cia agent trying to recruit a staff member of one of the russian special services. the russians say he was caught with wigs, cash, a knife and dark glasses. phil black live in moscow. wow. phil, tell me more about this spying claim there. >> reporter: sure, brooke. russia's leading spy agency, the fsb, says it picked up ryan fogle, detained him on the streets of moscow, overnight, and they videotaped the whole encounter. that's where we got the pictures we can show you now. it shows this man who is said to be ryan fogle, initially in a pretty unconvincing blonde wig, when he's first detained and then taken into the fsb building and questioned and they said they found him carrying as you described essentially a spy kit as well as all those little technical devices you described. he's also said to be carrying a big pile of cash and a written letter that the russians say were instructions and a financial offer to the man, the russian agent, that he was trying to turn, he was trying to recruit on behalf o
investigation was to determine who leaked details about a cia operation in yemen which foiled a terrorist plot. and while people like rnc chairman reince priebus suddenly emerge from hiding to call for the attorney general's head on a platter, holder, himself, said today he recused himself from the decision to seek those media records to avoid any conflict of interest. but that he did support the investigation into a dangerous leak. >> it is the top two or three most serious leaks that i've ever seen. it put the american people at risk, and that is not hyperbole. it put the american people at risk. and trying to determine who's responsible for that, i think, required very aggressive action. >> and as mr. holder prepares to be grilled by the house judiciary committee wednesday, it's worth noting this whole investigation was called for by members of congress such as senator john mccain. >> i call on the president to take immediate and decisive action, including the appointment of a special council, to aggressively investigate the leak of any classified information on which the recent stories wer
that it was the cia that said remove references to al qaeda. why didn't the white house get that information out sooner? with regard to this incident with the irs, tamron, i won't be surprised if there is a far more benign explanation. that there was a doubling of 501(c)(4) application and therefore somebody in cleveland was overwhelmed. didn't get additional resources and thought this was a shortcut to evaluate those applications. >> if that's the case, they should say it soon. the first thing they did was apologize. and they have since friday. if it is something as to your point of being overwhelmed, since we're always talking about leaks, someone might want to leak that out to try to clear up. right now it doesn't look good. michael tomasky, you have this article out. how to stop a scandal. you said you had already immediately called for the attorney general eric holder's rei go nation as it relates to the a.p. but you talk about some other things. has the administration started to stop any aspect of these scandals from benghazi, irs to the a.p.? >> i think they're doing okay on two out of th
of classified information into the ap about a covert c.i.a. operation in yemen that disrupted an airline bomb plot. attorney general eric holder recused himself from the probe last year, defended his department tuesday, calling the leak very, very serious. >> i've been a prosecutor since 1976 and i have to say that this is among if not the most serious, it is in the top two or three and most serious leaks that i've ever seen. put the american people at risk. that is not hyperbole. it put the american people at risk. >> paul: wall street editorial board member joins with us more. dorothy, is the media outrage over the subpoenas justified? >> well, justified, i think you could look at it as posturing. there is a lot of posturing about this, but it's not nothing either. that's because we use the word overbroad as the only excuse for this. that's a very clinical term for what really happened. you know, there was built into the justice department guidelines ways of getting this by alerting them. they could go to court. >> paul: they didn't alert the ap. >> exactly right. >> paul: it took weeks to
for spying for the cia. they've been convicted by tehran's revolutionary guard and were hanged at dawn. >>> and north korea, adding one more rocket launch to this weekend. a short-range missile fell into the waters off north korea's coast today. the launch has set back recent moves to ease tensions on the korean peninsula and appear to have been provoked by the u.s. aircraft carrier. >>> the white house of course under fire because treasury department officials were told of the irs investigation a year ago. but tonight, we have learned that some republican members of congress were also told back then. reena ninan joining us from the white house. reena, good evening. >> reporter: the white house officials were first made aware of the irs probe in late april. but insisted president obama wasn't informed then. instead, learning about it when the story broke in the media. white house aide dan pfeiffer says no orders were given to the irs to go after tea party groups. >> bottom line, no communication as far as you know from the white house, to the irs, about this targeting? >> no. absolutel
while trying to recruit a russian counter terrorism agent. neither the state department nor the cia is commenting. >> it's been an historic weekend for former high-school students in birmingham, alabama. hundreds of people from the class of 1963 finally had their prom. 50 years ago birmingham cancelled proms at all segregated schools because of civil rights protests. a remarkable reversal of fortune for a family who had fallen on hard times, next. [ other merv ] welcome back to the cleaning games. [ merv ] mr. clean magic eraser extra power was three times faster on permanent marker. it looks like mr. clean has won everything. the cleaning games are finished? and so are we. [ male announcer ] clean more, work less, with the mr. clean magic eraser extra power. icaused by acid reflux disease, relieving heartburn, [ male announcer ] clean more, work less, relief is at hand. for many, nexium provides 24-hour heartburn relief and may be available for just $18 a month. there is risk of bone fracture and low magnesium levels. side effects may include headache, abdominal pain, and diarrhea.
of them. what was taken out? all references to al qaeda and all references to cia warnings before the attack about the terror threat in benghazi. >> there it was. the major turning point in the benghazi saga. for months republicans had insisted the white house was trying to cover up serious failures related to the attack and had no evidence. now with this abc report well kind of looked like the press had maybe been duped. maybe the administration had been looking out for its image and preoccupied with politics. in context what happened next wasn't surprising. hours after abc's report about the benghazi emails news broke that irs had inappropriately scrutinized tea party and other groups seeking tax exempt status ahead of the 2012 elections. republicans pounced. it was a nixonian plot. any other week the media would have taken these charges with a giant grain of salt. but on the heels of the benghazi emails more complicated. monday the associated press announced the justice department had secretly obtained two months worth of reporters phone lotion as part of a leak investigation.
five reporters and an editor were an exclusive tip that the cia foiled an active terror thought in yemen tow coincide the death of osama bin laden. among the big issues here is the depth of the search. it was wide reaching and included home phones, cell
serious crime committed, namely the leaking and exposure of a cia double agent who had gotten inside al qaeda in yemen and who had exposed and prevented a plot to take down an airliner that could have killed hundreds of americans. it is one of the most serious crimes that could occur against this country, one of the most serious criminal offenses. what the administration is doing, they were fully within the law in terms of just going after what they call toll records, actual phone numbers. no conversations were eavesdropped on. >> julian, i'm sorry, i have to interrupt. we have to leave it there. we have a jam packed show. obviously we will be on this subject, have you both back to talk again. julian especially stone, ari melber, thanks. >> thanks. >>> coming up, the coordinator of an army sexual assault prevention program is tonight accused of abusive sexual conduct. joy reid will join me on that. >>> and the governor of minnesota will join me. >>> later tonight, my exclusive interview with five watertown police officers that stopped the boston marathon bombers terror spree, the office
agencies having information, the fbi, cia, other agencies, but not sharing it. we talked about it a lot in the wake of the boston marathon bombings. now we have it again here in this report. the inspector general of the justice department finding that the justice department not only didn't know definitively how many known or suspected terrorists were admitted into the witness security program, but also that the marshal service did not share information of potential value to the fbi before may 2012, just last year the marshal service, the fbi and other agencies did not have a formal process to share witness security terrorism information. they were not sharing this information. so what would happen is these individuals who participated in the witness security program would get new names. the federal government would provide them with these new identities. and then even though they were suspected terrorists and under their old names would not be allowed to fly because of the no-fly list, with their new names they were able to because this information wasn't being shared. it's another rema
, there with a a traditional, but real bureaucratic spat. >> the turf war between the c.i.a. and the state department an important thing? do we need to be having hearings about it? do we need to have topical issues focused on this, when we should be asking bigger questions about benghazi? >> the state department is spending tons of time reviewing security. it seems that the centrality of the spokespeople -- >> when you read that 100-some odd pages of the emails, the main emotion i kept having was i've done this in committee work before, right? it feems like the email when is you're trying to plan some sort of event. >> it's like sam stein, you've got to go through 100 emails. >> it's the kind of thing that before email changes would have just happened in person and you would have worked it out. it does feel like yes, they are asking some substantive questions. but it feels like somehow this long chain of emails becomes representative of something that was being hidden by, and it just feelts like no, haven't you guys ever been part of -- >> this is the aftermath of a leng legitimately horrible disaste
that perhaps benghazi talking points or e-mails back and forth between the state department or cia are not as compelling or understandable for most americans. but in this case it's difficult for the white house, particularly when they're having to comply with all kinds of investigations and everything else that's going to happen with congress, we're just seeing the beginning of these hearings and it's a big deal. i will point out the "new york times" has a great piece today looking at there were actually some liberal groups lumped in among these 400 groups, the vast majority of them were conservative. but there are about two dozen liberal organizations that got extra scrutiny. >> i wanted to ask you with our next topic, as a journalist your perspective on the controversy around the associated press, here's what came out on politico: "conflicting information is emerging over the process the justice department used to approve the subpoenas for associated press telephone record." >> it's difficult for me to take a view here. i'm a journalist, i've had many sources i protect and i wou
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)